ArticleAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2015
Neuropsychiatry and neural cubism.
Article in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychosocial Basis of Human Sufferings and Poverty in Patients with Neurological and Psychiatric Disorders.Medical research archives · 2023Article
- Ankyrin-G Heterozygous Knockout Mice Display Increased Sensitivity to Social Defeat Stress.Complex psychiatry · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The art movement known as Cubism did not represent a failure of perspective but, rather, was a movement aimed at advancing art by juxtaposing different perspectives. In this issue, Taylor and colleagues describe the current approach by neurologists and psychiatrists to patients with brain disorders as "Neural Cubism" because of the competing angles of these specialists' perspectives about these disorders. They advocate both integrated training for all residents in the two fields and a system of "nested hierarchies" to reclassify brain disorders according to their effect on levels of brain function. The unspoken premise of their article is that it is time for psychiatry and neurology to reunite.This Commentary takes the view that reuniting the long-separated specialties of neurology and psychiatry would not necessarily create better care for all patients with brain disorders but that trainees in both fields would benefit from increased training in the complementary specialty. The new Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education clinical neuroscience milestones for psychiatry training and psychiatry milestones for neurology training are steps in the right direction. Increasing opportunities for combined neurology-psychiatry training will help create a cadre of specialists equipped to efficiently care for complex patients within emerging accountable care organizations. Drawing from two fields in the service of understanding brain-behavior interactions increases the potential for innovation at their interface. The author concludes that the time has come to increase the neurological and neuroscience content of psychiatry training but not to unite the two fields.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25340368What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.